2022 (7) TMI 1218 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal Upholds Deletion of Protective Additions, Partially Allows AO's Appeal on Commission Income

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3 (2), Mumbai Versus Vishnu Textile Trade P. Ltd., Varad Vinayak Textiles Pvt. Ltd.

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 3 (2), Mumbai Versus Vishnu Textile Trade P. Ltd., Varad Vinayak Textiles Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Deletion of protective addition of unaccounted investment and commission.2. Confirmation of substantive additions in the hands of beneficiaries.3. Addition of commission income in the hands of the assessee as an accommodation entry provider.Detailed Analysis:Issue 1: Deletion of Protective Addition of Unaccounted Investment and CommissionThe learned Assessing Officer (AO) challenged the deletion of protective additions made by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] in the case of Vishnu Textile Trade P. Ltd. The AO had added Rs. 5.10 crores as unaccounted investment and Rs. 12.75 lakhs as unaccounted commission under Section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The CIT(A) deleted these additions on the grounds that the investments were recorded in the regular books and the sources were explained through corresponding liabilities. The CIT(A) also noted that substantive additions had been confirmed in the hands of the actual beneficiaries, not the assessee.Issue 2: Confirmation of Substantive Additions in the Hands of BeneficiariesThe CIT(A) confirmed substantive additions in the hands of various companies, such as M/s Solitaire Texfab Traders & Textiles P. Ltd., M/s Bhagwat Textiles P. Ltd., M/s Starwood Exports P. Ltd., M/s Rikosh Fashions P. Ltd., and M/s First Winner Textiles (India) P. Ltd. These companies were found to have received accommodation entries from the assessee. The CIT(A) upheld the substantive additions under Section 68 for amounts ranging from Rs. 25 lakhs to Rs. 1.85 crores, thereby justifying the deletion of protective additions in the hands of the assessee.Issue 3: Addition of Commission Income in the Hands of the AssesseeThe Tribunal found that the assessee was an accommodation entry provider, and thus, the commission income of Rs. 12.75 lakhs at the rate of 2.5% of the accommodation entry should be added to the assessee's income. The Tribunal reversed the CIT(A)'s decision to delete this commission income, emphasizing that the assessee's role as an entry provider warranted this addition.Conclusion for ITA No. 2120/Mum/2019:The Tribunal dismissed the AO's appeal regarding the deletion of protective additions of Rs. 5.10 crores and Rs. 12.75 lakhs, confirming the CIT(A)'s decision. However, the Tribunal allowed the AO's appeal concerning the addition of commission income, reversing the CIT(A)'s deletion of Rs. 12.75 lakhs. Thus, the AO's appeal was partly allowed.Case of DCIT Vs. VARAD Vinayak Textiles Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 1877/Mum/2019):Issue 1: Deletion of Protective Addition of Unaccounted Investment and CommissionSimilar to the first case, the AO appealed against the CIT(A)'s deletion of Rs. 7 crores as unaccounted investment and Rs. 17.50 lakhs as commission in the hands of VARAD Vinayak Textiles Pvt. Ltd. The CIT(A) deleted these additions on protective grounds, confirming substantive additions in the hands of the actual beneficiaries.Issue 2: Confirmation of Substantive Additions in the Hands of BeneficiariesThe CIT(A) confirmed substantive additions in the hands of the beneficiaries, similar to the previous case, thereby justifying the deletion of protective additions in the hands of the assessee.Issue 3: Addition of Commission Income in the Hands of the AssesseeThe Tribunal found that the assessee was an accommodation entry provider and reversed the CIT(A)'s decision to delete the commission income of Rs. 17.50 lakhs. The Tribunal emphasized that the commission income should be added to the assessee's income due to its role as an entry provider.Conclusion for ITA No. 1877/Mum/2019:The Tribunal dismissed the AO's appeal regarding the deletion of protective additions of Rs. 7 crores and Rs. 17.50 lakhs, confirming the CIT(A)'s decision. However, the Tribunal allowed the AO's appeal concerning the addition of commission income, reversing the CIT(A)'s deletion of Rs. 17.50 lakhs. Thus, the AO's appeal was partly allowed.Final Order:Both appeals were partly allowed, with the Tribunal confirming the deletion of protective additions but reversing the deletion of commission income in both cases. The orders were pronounced in the open court on 26.07.2022.